Pub Date : 2022-01-31DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2021.2022315
Thomas Perry, R. Morris, Rosanna Lea
ABSTRACT Replication studies in education are relatively rare. Of the few which are conducted, many are conceptual rather than direct replications. With so few replication studies, and many of those that are attempted producing null results, the scientific status of the evidence base for educational policy and practice is in question. Replicating Makel and Plucker’s review of the education replication literature, conducted in 2014, this paper presents a mapping review looking at rates of replication in education research from 2011 to 2020. We provide an overview of the number of replication studies by replication type, year, outcome, authorship, and journal. Our results are consistent with those of Makel and Plucker, revealing very low but gradually increasing rates of replication study in education. We discuss the role of replication in producing a robust and trustworthy evidence base for policy and practice, and some of the challenges in operationalising definitions of replication we encountered.
{"title":"A decade of replication study in education? A mapping review (2011–2020)","authors":"Thomas Perry, R. Morris, Rosanna Lea","doi":"10.1080/13803611.2021.2022315","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.2022315","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Replication studies in education are relatively rare. Of the few which are conducted, many are conceptual rather than direct replications. With so few replication studies, and many of those that are attempted producing null results, the scientific status of the evidence base for educational policy and practice is in question. Replicating Makel and Plucker’s review of the education replication literature, conducted in 2014, this paper presents a mapping review looking at rates of replication in education research from 2011 to 2020. We provide an overview of the number of replication studies by replication type, year, outcome, authorship, and journal. Our results are consistent with those of Makel and Plucker, revealing very low but gradually increasing rates of replication study in education. We discuss the role of replication in producing a robust and trustworthy evidence base for policy and practice, and some of the challenges in operationalising definitions of replication we encountered.","PeriodicalId":47025,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research and Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48402107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-31DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2021.2022310
Matthew C. Makel, M. S. Meyer, M. Simonsen, A. Roberts, J. Plucker
Replication has received increasing attention over the last decade. This comes on the heels of prominent instances of data fabrication (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2017) and estimates that few studies attempt to replicate previous findings (Makel & Plucker, 2014). Replication has been called the Supreme Court of science (Collins, 1985), as well as a basic building block of scholarship. One persistent question in informal conversations that we have not seen addressed in formal writing, is replication’s relevance to qualitative research. Qualitative research is "a situated activity that locates the observer in the world" and "consists of a set of interpretive, material practices that make the world visible" (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011, p. 3). Some have argued that replication “missed the point” of qualitative research (Pratt et al., 2020, p. 3). However, in a survey of nearly 1,500 recently published education researchers, less than 10% of qualitative researchers reported that replication should never be used (Makel et al., 2021). Given the prevalence of qualitative research in education, it is important to examine replication’s relevance. In this commentary, we argue that replication is relevant to the qualitative lens in at least three ways. First, replication supports the established values in qualitative research of transparency and intentionality. Second, replication can be used to assess the well-established tradition of transferability. Third, replication can evaluate connections between reflexivity, as evidenced by positionality statements, and qualitative research findings.
{"title":"Replication is relevant to qualitative research","authors":"Matthew C. Makel, M. S. Meyer, M. Simonsen, A. Roberts, J. Plucker","doi":"10.1080/13803611.2021.2022310","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.2022310","url":null,"abstract":"Replication has received increasing attention over the last decade. This comes on the heels of prominent instances of data fabrication (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2017) and estimates that few studies attempt to replicate previous findings (Makel & Plucker, 2014). Replication has been called the Supreme Court of science (Collins, 1985), as well as a basic building block of scholarship. One persistent question in informal conversations that we have not seen addressed in formal writing, is replication’s relevance to qualitative research. Qualitative research is \"a situated activity that locates the observer in the world\" and \"consists of a set of interpretive, material practices that make the world visible\" (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011, p. 3). Some have argued that replication “missed the point” of qualitative research (Pratt et al., 2020, p. 3). However, in a survey of nearly 1,500 recently published education researchers, less than 10% of qualitative researchers reported that replication should never be used (Makel et al., 2021). Given the prevalence of qualitative research in education, it is important to examine replication’s relevance. In this commentary, we argue that replication is relevant to the qualitative lens in at least three ways. First, replication supports the established values in qualitative research of transparency and intentionality. Second, replication can be used to assess the well-established tradition of transferability. Third, replication can evaluate connections between reflexivity, as evidenced by positionality statements, and qualitative research findings.","PeriodicalId":47025,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research and Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42526938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-31DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2021.2022317
B. See, R. Morris, S. Gorard, N. Siddiqui, M. Easterbrook, M. Nieuwenhuis, K. Fox, P. Harris, R. Banerjee
ABSTRACT This paper describes an independently evaluated randomised controlled trial of a self-affirmation intervention, replicating earlier studies, mostly conducted in the US with ethnic minority students. Self-affirmation theory suggests that some stigmatised groups, such as those from ethnic minority or poor families, face stereotype threats which undermine their academic performance. Engaging in value affirmation writing activities when such threats are most salient can give individuals a positive sense of value, negating harmful feelings, and fostering academic learning. The present study, involving 10,807 pupils aged 14 to 16 in England showed that the intervention can be successfully replicated with children from low socioeconomic backgrounds in England. The analysis showed positive effects for the intervention group. Pupils who completed more exercises also performed better. The findings are worth consideration given that it costs virtually nothing and does no harm.
{"title":"A conceptual replication study of a self-affirmation intervention to improve the academic achievement of low-income pupils in England","authors":"B. See, R. Morris, S. Gorard, N. Siddiqui, M. Easterbrook, M. Nieuwenhuis, K. Fox, P. Harris, R. Banerjee","doi":"10.1080/13803611.2021.2022317","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.2022317","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper describes an independently evaluated randomised controlled trial of a self-affirmation intervention, replicating earlier studies, mostly conducted in the US with ethnic minority students. Self-affirmation theory suggests that some stigmatised groups, such as those from ethnic minority or poor families, face stereotype threats which undermine their academic performance. Engaging in value affirmation writing activities when such threats are most salient can give individuals a positive sense of value, negating harmful feelings, and fostering academic learning. The present study, involving 10,807 pupils aged 14 to 16 in England showed that the intervention can be successfully replicated with children from low socioeconomic backgrounds in England. The analysis showed positive effects for the intervention group. Pupils who completed more exercises also performed better. The findings are worth consideration given that it costs virtually nothing and does no harm.","PeriodicalId":47025,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research and Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43725559","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Appreciation to reviewers","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/13803611.2021.1979313","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.1979313","url":null,"abstract":"(2020). Appreciation to reviewers. Educational Research and Evaluation: Vol. 26, CROSS-CULTURAL EXAMINATIONS OF TEST-TAKING EFFORT IN PISA, pp. i-i.","PeriodicalId":47025,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research and Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138536035","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-16DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2021.1972384
P. Harindranathan
behind many of the works of these thinkers. While the book is not specifically focused on educational research methodology, it would be useful to understand how these theories were developed. The book is also unclear about whether it is about how these theories have been, or should be practised in reality. Although, at the beginning of this volume, the authors claim to provide some suggestions for application, there is a lack of evidence on where these theories could be applied. For instance, in the section Applying the Theory, the authors mention several times that “this theory has been practised by many countries/schools/teachers” (e.g., Chapters 3 and 17), but provide no evidence, references, or the context within which they were used. The suggestions offered in many chapters were unclear about whether they are evidence-based or simply hypothetical. For example, they argue that multiple intelligences can improve children’s selfesteem and confidence to support the application of this theory, but they present no robust empirical evidence to support this. In summary, this book provides a useful introduction to the thinking of contemporary educational theorists. It is beneficial to novices in education or anyone who is looking for a whistle-stop tour of contemporary educational theories, though their origins in research and evidence are unclear.
{"title":"How learning happens: seminal works in educational psychology and what they mean in practice","authors":"P. Harindranathan","doi":"10.1080/13803611.2021.1972384","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.1972384","url":null,"abstract":"behind many of the works of these thinkers. While the book is not specifically focused on educational research methodology, it would be useful to understand how these theories were developed. The book is also unclear about whether it is about how these theories have been, or should be practised in reality. Although, at the beginning of this volume, the authors claim to provide some suggestions for application, there is a lack of evidence on where these theories could be applied. For instance, in the section Applying the Theory, the authors mention several times that “this theory has been practised by many countries/schools/teachers” (e.g., Chapters 3 and 17), but provide no evidence, references, or the context within which they were used. The suggestions offered in many chapters were unclear about whether they are evidence-based or simply hypothetical. For example, they argue that multiple intelligences can improve children’s selfesteem and confidence to support the application of this theory, but they present no robust empirical evidence to support this. In summary, this book provides a useful introduction to the thinking of contemporary educational theorists. It is beneficial to novices in education or anyone who is looking for a whistle-stop tour of contemporary educational theories, though their origins in research and evidence are unclear.","PeriodicalId":47025,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research and Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46987734","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-16DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2021.1991810
Wilfred Uunk, Magdalena Pratter
ABSTRACT We study gender differences in the selection of traditional universities versus universities of applied sciences in Germany. Do women, due to life and job goals, less often enrol than men in traditional universities and more often enrol at the more practice- and profession-oriented universities of applied sciences? Or are women overrepresented at traditional universities due to prior educational choices and outcomes such as higher school grades and more frequent choice of non-technical fields of study? Our analyses on a national sample of 1st-year students report a 14-percentage point higher likelihood of women than men to enter traditional universities. This gender gap can almost entirely be attributed to educational factors, specifically women’s less frequent choice of engineering majors, and hardly by job goal preferences. That, net of these factors, no gender difference exists indicates that women in Germany do not aim lower or higher than men as to the institution choice.
{"title":"Gender differences in higher education in Germany: are women under- or overrepresented at university, and why?","authors":"Wilfred Uunk, Magdalena Pratter","doi":"10.1080/13803611.2021.1991810","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.1991810","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We study gender differences in the selection of traditional universities versus universities of applied sciences in Germany. Do women, due to life and job goals, less often enrol than men in traditional universities and more often enrol at the more practice- and profession-oriented universities of applied sciences? Or are women overrepresented at traditional universities due to prior educational choices and outcomes such as higher school grades and more frequent choice of non-technical fields of study? Our analyses on a national sample of 1st-year students report a 14-percentage point higher likelihood of women than men to enter traditional universities. This gender gap can almost entirely be attributed to educational factors, specifically women’s less frequent choice of engineering majors, and hardly by job goal preferences. That, net of these factors, no gender difference exists indicates that women in Germany do not aim lower or higher than men as to the institution choice.","PeriodicalId":47025,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research and Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44433655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-16DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2021.1977153
Laura Dörrenbächer-Ulrich, Lisa Stark, F. Perels
ABSTRACT Although recent research has focused on teachers’ attitudes concerning inclusive education, studies on teachers’ concerns about heterogeneity in inclusive education and on the implementation of inclusive teaching into their educational practice are sparse. Based on the concerns-based adoption model, the present study investigated whether there are different teacher profiles with regard to their concerns and behaviour regarding heterogeneity in inclusive classrooms and to what extent these profiles differ with regard to subjective dimensions (attitudes, subjective norms, self-efficacy, background factors such as experience and emotions). Three profiles merging teachers’ Stages of Concern and Levels of Use (impact-concerned co-operators, unconcerned mechanical users, moderately concerned non-users) were identified in a sample of N = 113 teachers. Moreover, substantial differences between the three profiles regarding all of the subjective dimensions were detected. It is discussed how these results can be used for supporting teachers in dealing with heterogeneity in inclusive education.
{"title":"Profiles of teachers’ concerns about heterogeneity in classrooms","authors":"Laura Dörrenbächer-Ulrich, Lisa Stark, F. Perels","doi":"10.1080/13803611.2021.1977153","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.1977153","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Although recent research has focused on teachers’ attitudes concerning inclusive education, studies on teachers’ concerns about heterogeneity in inclusive education and on the implementation of inclusive teaching into their educational practice are sparse. Based on the concerns-based adoption model, the present study investigated whether there are different teacher profiles with regard to their concerns and behaviour regarding heterogeneity in inclusive classrooms and to what extent these profiles differ with regard to subjective dimensions (attitudes, subjective norms, self-efficacy, background factors such as experience and emotions). Three profiles merging teachers’ Stages of Concern and Levels of Use (impact-concerned co-operators, unconcerned mechanical users, moderately concerned non-users) were identified in a sample of N = 113 teachers. Moreover, substantial differences between the three profiles regarding all of the subjective dimensions were detected. It is discussed how these results can be used for supporting teachers in dealing with heterogeneity in inclusive education.","PeriodicalId":47025,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research and Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41835937","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-16DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2021.1969810
Y. Tan
{"title":"Understanding and using challenging educational theories","authors":"Y. Tan","doi":"10.1080/13803611.2021.1969810","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.1969810","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47025,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research and Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45407763","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-16DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2021.1968442
G. Marks
ABSTRACT Most studies on the relationship between students’ socioeconomic status (SES) and student achievement assume that its effects are sizable and causal. A large variety of theoretical explanations have been proposed. However, the SES–achievement association may reflect, to some extent, the inter-relationships of parents’ abilities, SES, children’s abilities, and student achievement. The purpose of this study is to quantify the role of SES vis-à-vis child and parents’ abilities, and prior achievement. Analyses of a covariance matrix that includes supplementary correlations for fathers and mothers’ abilities derived from the literature indicate that more than half of the SES–achievement association can be accounted for by parents’ abilities. SES coefficients decline further with the addition of child’s abilities. With the addition of prior achievement, the SES coefficients are trivial implying that SES has little or no contemporaneous effects. These findings are not compatible with standard theoretical explanations for SES inequalities in achievement.
{"title":"Is the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and student achievement causal? Considering student and parent abilities","authors":"G. Marks","doi":"10.1080/13803611.2021.1968442","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.1968442","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Most studies on the relationship between students’ socioeconomic status (SES) and student achievement assume that its effects are sizable and causal. A large variety of theoretical explanations have been proposed. However, the SES–achievement association may reflect, to some extent, the inter-relationships of parents’ abilities, SES, children’s abilities, and student achievement. The purpose of this study is to quantify the role of SES vis-à-vis child and parents’ abilities, and prior achievement. Analyses of a covariance matrix that includes supplementary correlations for fathers and mothers’ abilities derived from the literature indicate that more than half of the SES–achievement association can be accounted for by parents’ abilities. SES coefficients decline further with the addition of child’s abilities. With the addition of prior achievement, the SES coefficients are trivial implying that SES has little or no contemporaneous effects. These findings are not compatible with standard theoretical explanations for SES inequalities in achievement.","PeriodicalId":47025,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research and Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44764218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-16DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2021.1991643
K. Morrison, G. P. van der Werf
The opening pages of Pearl and Mackenzie’s volume The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect (2018) herald their captivating romp through causality by referring to a “ladder of causation” (p. 28) that starts from association (by seeing and observing), moves up to intervention (by doing and intervening), and thence to counterfactuals (by imagining, retrospection, and understanding). Each rung of the ladder establishes causality more certainly. Humans think causally. Causality can be studied by many methods. Here, Pearl and Mackenzie (2018) state that statistical analysis does not simply concern data and their methods of analysis; rather, there is a need for an “understanding of the process that produces the data” (p. 85). Such “understanding” comes from introducing causality, as causality yields something additional to the original data. “Methods” of data analysis are informed by an “understanding” of causality, as this Editorial shows. Pearl and Mackenzie write that if we remove the understanding of causation from statistical analysis, all that we are left with is data reduction, which does not tell us much. The papers in this issue move forward from “methods” to “understanding” data with regard to causality. Further, the Editorial indicates how easily it is to find expressions of causality in articles; this should caution researchers to take care in the wording that they use. The Editorial below draws attention to wording in deliberately italicising causal words in quoting from the articles in this issue. For example, is causality really being demonstrated, or, like Pearl and MacKenzie’s lowest rung of the ladder, is there merely association? Causality, be it post hoc or ante hoc, is self-evidently important in education. However, how we adduce causality is far from straightforward, and the papers in this issue yield insights into, and cautions concerning, claims for, and demonstrations of, causality. The papers here indicate methods, challenges, outcomes, and benefits of studying causality. The challenges of “methods” and “understanding” when investigating causality are legion. Witness, for example, in the perennial search for causality, its differences from association, prediction, explanation, inference, influence, correlation, accounting for, correspondence to, purposiveness, and a whole armoury of other words. Look at the dangers of working with mediating, confounding, and moderating variables, transitivity, or controlling out almost everything such that what remains is very little. Wrestle with underdetermination, overdetermination, supervenience, and the difficulties of mereology. Consider the challenges of probabilistic causation and Bayesian approaches, leavened by multilevel causal modelling. Add to these the context-dense, variable-rich, causally complex world of education, and the attraction of Pearl and MacKenzie’s (2018) “childlike simplicity” (p. 39) of a causal diagram evaporates in front of our eyes. Little wonder it i
{"title":"Methods, understandings, and expressions of causality in educational research","authors":"K. Morrison, G. P. van der Werf","doi":"10.1080/13803611.2021.1991643","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.1991643","url":null,"abstract":"The opening pages of Pearl and Mackenzie’s volume The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect (2018) herald their captivating romp through causality by referring to a “ladder of causation” (p. 28) that starts from association (by seeing and observing), moves up to intervention (by doing and intervening), and thence to counterfactuals (by imagining, retrospection, and understanding). Each rung of the ladder establishes causality more certainly. Humans think causally. Causality can be studied by many methods. Here, Pearl and Mackenzie (2018) state that statistical analysis does not simply concern data and their methods of analysis; rather, there is a need for an “understanding of the process that produces the data” (p. 85). Such “understanding” comes from introducing causality, as causality yields something additional to the original data. “Methods” of data analysis are informed by an “understanding” of causality, as this Editorial shows. Pearl and Mackenzie write that if we remove the understanding of causation from statistical analysis, all that we are left with is data reduction, which does not tell us much. The papers in this issue move forward from “methods” to “understanding” data with regard to causality. Further, the Editorial indicates how easily it is to find expressions of causality in articles; this should caution researchers to take care in the wording that they use. The Editorial below draws attention to wording in deliberately italicising causal words in quoting from the articles in this issue. For example, is causality really being demonstrated, or, like Pearl and MacKenzie’s lowest rung of the ladder, is there merely association? Causality, be it post hoc or ante hoc, is self-evidently important in education. However, how we adduce causality is far from straightforward, and the papers in this issue yield insights into, and cautions concerning, claims for, and demonstrations of, causality. The papers here indicate methods, challenges, outcomes, and benefits of studying causality. The challenges of “methods” and “understanding” when investigating causality are legion. Witness, for example, in the perennial search for causality, its differences from association, prediction, explanation, inference, influence, correlation, accounting for, correspondence to, purposiveness, and a whole armoury of other words. Look at the dangers of working with mediating, confounding, and moderating variables, transitivity, or controlling out almost everything such that what remains is very little. Wrestle with underdetermination, overdetermination, supervenience, and the difficulties of mereology. Consider the challenges of probabilistic causation and Bayesian approaches, leavened by multilevel causal modelling. Add to these the context-dense, variable-rich, causally complex world of education, and the attraction of Pearl and MacKenzie’s (2018) “childlike simplicity” (p. 39) of a causal diagram evaporates in front of our eyes. Little wonder it i","PeriodicalId":47025,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research and Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48385374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：